launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Robert Collins <robertc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Jeroen Vermeulen <jtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Several db-devel branches are ready for deployment.  We'd better catch up
> before everyone's away for holidays!
>
> Stuart, any chance you could request the appropriate rollouts for these?
>  Besides being on vacation and having some offline places to go to, I'm not
> sure I'd get the requests right.  Here's a summary, from oldest to newest:
>
>
> stub
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable/revision/11209
> [r=stub][no-qa] New database baseline
> → Re-bases the database patches; shouldn't involve any patching at all
> AFAICS.

This is basically a no-op - not something needing a FDT deploy

> jelmer
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable/revision/11215
> [r=stub][bug=891928] Allow the deb_version_template field in
> sourcepackagerecipedata to be NULL.
> http://launchpad.net/bugs/891928
> → Drops a NOT NULL constraint.  Sounds very hot-patchable.

Fairly sure this requires an exclusive table lock, so fast downtime.

> stub
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable/revision/11219
> [r=stub][no-qa] LaunchpadDatabase* should not end up in sampledata
> → Affects the Makefile, but not the database as such.

Also does not need to be deployed as such

> jtv
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~launchpad-pqm/launchpad/db-stable/revision/11224
> [r=lifeless, stub][bug=849683] NOT NULL constraints on {Binary,
> Source}PackagePublishingHistory.{binary, source}packagename.
> http://launchpad.net/bugs/849683
> → Took 8 seconds on staging.

Needs a FDT deploy.

That means 2 FDT deploys - it will depend on when stub goes on leave
if these happen before the shutdown period, or after - I'm already on
leave. (We don't do them, but they shouldn't be done when there won't
be folk around to recover *if* something goes screwy.

-Rob